447 So. 2d 838 - Inzer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “" 'The initial existence of a conspiracy may not be proved by the statements of the co-conspirator.' Ingle v. State , 415 So.2d 1225 , 1228-29 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). 'Before the statements of one co-conspirator may be admitted against another co-conspirator, only prima facie evidence of the existence of the conspiracy is necessary.' Lewis v. State , 414 So.2d 135 , 140 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied , 414 So.2d 140 (Ala. 1982). . . . While it is preferable that the testimony of a co-conspirator or hearsay testimony concerning the acts and statements of a co-conspirator be received into evidence after a prima facie showing of the existence of a conspiracy, such order of proof is not mandatory. 'The order of proof requirement is for the purpose of expediting the trial and saving the valuable time of the trial court, rather than protecting or securing any supposed right a defendant might have.' Nance v. State , 424 So.2d 1358 , 1365 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982); Snoddy v. State , 20 Ala. App. 168 , 101 So. 303 (1924); Smith v. State , 8 Ala. App. 187 , 62 So. 575 (1913)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 508 So. 2d 302 - Creech v. State

2. “this court found the proper Miranda rights given, voluntariness predicate established, and, ultimately, a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver thereof regardless of the accused's refusal to sign a waiver of rights form.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 500 So. 2d 1273 - Hodges v. State